A Self-Powered Camera which can record video forever has been invented

[SIGSEGV]

This would be awesome for drones and some other applications:

All digital cameras and camcorders have a sensor that converts light into the digital image, but to work, it requires electricity. What if you can convert the light coming to the sensor to image and electricity at the same time? Then you’ll get a camera that can be powered by itself indefinitely.

In theory, this sounds like a perpetual motion machine [ummm... It really doesn't], but a group of researchers at Columbia University have achieved that.

Although the resolution of this camera is not exactly what we want for our daily needs, the camera can record one image per second and theoretically run indefinitely. The resolution is only 30×40 pixels. As soon as the light arrives at the sensor, it turns into a picture, and then into electricity. Practically photodiodes are used in photoconductive and photovoltaic operation one after another.

This process is a complete revolution in digital photography and digital video.

 

Finally, this technology could advance enough that the sensor can partially powered the camera, and the standard batteries will last much longer. It will be a complete change in the work professional photographs have. If it reaches the level in which we won’t have the need for battery completely, it would be fascinating.

Source: http://www.realtechtoday.com/gadgets/self-powered-camera-which-can-record-video-endlessly/

[Tedster]

Ah, but it can't record forever because it doesn't have the storage for it...

 

This is awesome though.

[Arty]

New Goal: 8k

[MrLewisMHarris]

This would be awesome for drones and some other applications:

Source: http://www.realtechtoday.com/gadgets/self-powered-camera-which-can-record-video-endlessly/

 

"Forever" is a long time. What about when humans become extinct? Or when light ceases to be a thing? but still pretty cool blah blah

[___]

"Forever" is a long time. What about when humans become extinct? Or when light ceases to be a thing? but still pretty cool blah blah

Well I mean, it runs off of light.. So not forever 

[HippY]

Ah, but it can't record forever because it doesn't have the storage for it...

 

This is awesome though.

It can capture video forever, it just cannot record it, correct:D

 

"Forever" is a long time. What about when humans become extinct? Or when light ceases to be a thing? but still pretty cool blah blah

Forever="extremely long time". It is just an online article, not a scientific research paper

[MrLewisMHarris]

It can capture video forever, it just cannot record it, correct:D

 

Forever="extremely long time". It is just an online article, not a scientific research paper

 

It's called Joke. And an online news site called "realTechToday", that, from what I can see, doesn't use a biased/opinion based verbiage, can be used as a scientific research paper (since technology LITERALLY IS science.)

 

Also, I know you're not the creator of the article or anything, (or the creator of this camera or anything) but wouldn't the ability to produce electricity in the camera just always reproduce exactly the same amount of electricity (unless someone found a new way to hardness electricity from light that was more efficient)? What I'm getting at is that unless they aren't capping the amount of incoming electricity generated from the light source (which I'm assuming they are since... why wouldn't they) then they aren't likely to be able to build a camera that records at any higher speeds, or of any higher resolution, because better equipment = more electricity usage.

 

The only thing I can find to contradict that (and I'm no expert on camera's so sorry if this is completely wrong) is that the input of light (that generates electricity) would be a lot higher with a higher resolution sensor. Or is that just completely insane and I'm an idiot?

[shujin]

It's called Joke. And an online news site called "realTechToday", that, from what I can see, doesn't use a biased/opinion based verbiage, can be used as a scientific research paper (since technology LITERALLY IS science.)

 

Also, I know you're not the creator of the article or anything, (or the creator of this camera or anything) but wouldn't the ability to produce electricity in the camera just always reproduce exactly the same amount of electricity (unless someone found a new way to hardness electricity from light that was more efficient)? What I'm getting at is that unless they aren't capping the amount of incoming electricity generated from the light source (which I'm assuming they are since... why wouldn't they) then they aren't likely to be able to build a camera that records at any higher speeds, or of any higher resolution, because better equipment = more electricity usage.

 

The only thing I can find to contradict that (and I'm no expert on camera's so sorry if this is completely wrong) is that the input of light (that generates electricity) would be a lot higher with a higher resolution sensor. Or is that just completely insane and I'm an idiot?

we can't capture all the energy of light yet sensor are sadly still really bad if we develop better sensor we could improve this little camera don't worry for that there is already a lot of people that are working for new sensor to happen

[SuperHira]

You are right in that if the camera is not already harnessing near 100% of the light's energy, the only way to improve quality is through vetter efficiency in converting light to electricity. If the efficiency is already near 100% then there is very little that can be done.

[martinrox1568]

Ah, but it can't record forever because it doesn't have the storage for it...

 

This is awesome though.

meh, it's 30x40 with a low color depth(seems like only black and white) and 1fps. I'd bet that a 2 terabyte hardrive can store everything from it for probably a century. (too lazy to do calculations I may either be under or over estimating)

[Tedster]

meh, it's 30x40 with a low color depth(seems like only black and white) and 1fps. I'd bet that a 2 terabyte hardrive can store everything from it for probably a century. (too lazy to do calculations I may either be under or over estimating)

Well, let's see. If we assume that 720p (1280x720) at 30fps works at 3mbps, we can do it for 88889 minutes (61 days, 17 hours ish) with 2TB:

So if we go and divide the amount of pixels for 720p by the amount of pixels for this camera (30x40), this gives us 768:

We will then divide 3mbps by 768: 

That gives us 3.906 kilobits per second (or four, because we choose to round it like that).

That gives us 125+ years at 30fps.

[SIGSEGV]

meh, it's 30x40 with a low color depth(seems like only black and white) and 1fps. I'd bet that a 2 terabyte hardrive can store everything from it for probably a century. (too lazy to do calculations I may either be under or over estimating)

Lets for a second assume that it can display 256 levels of black to white, this would mean we would need 8 bits to represent 1 pixel the resolution is 30x40 so there are a total of 1200 pixels, 1200x8=9600. So we need 9600 bits to represent 1 frame and since the thing can only record at 1 frame a second:

9600 bits=1200 Bytes and 2TB= 2199023255552 Bytes

The thing would take about 1832519379.6266666666666667 seconds to fill the drive which is

58.070275274171720525 Years

 

You'd need about 4TB to store a centuries worth of video from it, unless of course you used some kind of compression

[FakezZ]

What if you record at night or in a dark room?

[MrDynamicMan]

Hey, did anyone think of a camera with a small solar panel? Because it would work just as well as this but be infinitely* better than this.

*see what I did there

Also walk into a dark room adamant your "infinite" camera just died.

[Tedster]

Hey, did anyone think of a camera with a small solar panel? Because it would work just as well as this but be infinitely* better than this.

*see what I did there

Also walk into a dark room adamant your "infinite" camera just died.

Yup, this is a better solution.

But a camera that's powered by what it's powering is the main thing.

[Aniallation]

That gives us 125+ years at 30fps.

And this is even longer considering 1fps.

[multifrag]

Just put a solar panel to a normal camera and it will do same job with better quality. well done with the project, but it has a flaw as all solar panels. It needs sunlight to operate so it wont work indefinitely.

[SIGSEGV]

Just put a solar panel to a normal camera and it will do same job with better quality. well done with the project, but it has a flaw as all solar panels. It needs sunlight to operate so it wont work indefinitely.

It doesn't need sunlight, it works with any light

[amintha1992]

solar panel + camera = forever on. 

[LukaP]

It doesn't need sunlight, it works with any light

so does a solar panel.

 

Also, technically this can record forever (assuming light). It would just have to record over the previous data.

[Tedster]

And this is even longer considering 1fps.

Yup, I was too bored to calculate for 1fps.

[RagnarokDel]

"Forever" is a long time. What about when humans become extinct? Or when light ceases to be a thing? but still pretty cool blah blah

light ceases to be a thing? Light isnt a trend.

[LOLPhilips]

light ceases to be a thing? Light isnt a trend.

Well it says forever and helium will in that time period run out for stars to be powered with and just theoretically spoken light will cease to be "a thing" and thats just if our universe ends peacefully.

[martinrox1568]

Lets for a second assume that it can display 256 levels of black to white, this would mean we would need 8 bits to represent 1 pixel the resolution is 30x40 so there are a total of 1200 pixels, 1200x8=9600. So we need 9600 bits to represent 1 frame and since the thing can only record at 1 frame a second:

9600 bits=1200 Bytes and 2TB= 2199023255552 Bytes

The thing would take about 1832519379.6266666666666667 seconds to fill the drive which is

58.070275274171720525 Years

 

You'd need about 4TB to store a centuries worth of video from it, unless of course you used some kind of compression

Well, this is considering it is without compression, which for this video would be plain stupid. And theoretically speaking, since this only has 256 colors to display, there would be ALOT of room for compression. Someone else used a reference of a 720p at 30mbps and got 125+ years without even compensating for the colors available to a 720p. Infact, would I not be right in saying since there will only be 256 unique artifacts,  a specific compression where every individual pixel is layed out on an x y coordinate plane, and simply have 256 variables to describe each pixel would possibly work, and work losslessly, correct? An analogy could be battleship where instead of sinking a ship, you assign it a variable from 1-256

[martinrox1568]

Well, let's see. If we assume that 720p (1280x720) at 30fps works at 3mbps, we can do it for 88889 minutes (61 days, 17 hours ish) with 2TB:

So if we go and divide the amount of pixels for 720p by the amount of pixels for this camera (30x40), this gives us 768:

We will then divide 3mbps by 768: 

That gives us 3.906 kilobits per second (or four, because we choose to round it like that).

That gives us 125+ years at 30fps.

It would be even better because this only has to capture 256 colors compared to millions that an rgb display will allowing for much better compression